I'd like to stress the "most humble" part Matt52 refers to. Lucking out on a superstar might be a homerun, lucking out on a humble superstar for sure is a grand slam. As an example, it can be argued that LBJ and Howard might be better basketball players than the two D's, however they are not the humble superstars when compared to the two.

Whereas Duncan said no to Disneyland and stuck with the small market Spurs, and Durant announced his contract extension on Twitter, Howard cried his way out of Orlando to an even bigger market in L.A., and LBJ had "The Decision". Similar highly drafted superstar franchise players, different attitudes in humility.

Ownership/management in both Cleveland and Orlando will say that they did the best they could to keep their respective players. It just so happened that these players made their own decision to leave the team.

Maybe we should change the spelling of Bargnani to Dargnani. In that way whenever he fails to rebound we can all scream "DARGN!" in unison.

I actually disagree with this quite significantly. This is one of the strengths of teams like the Spurs and OKC lies.

Lebron and Dwight both re-signeded with their teams initially aswell (much like Durant they were restricted free agents).

Their secondary and tertiary peices were guys like Antwan Jamison, Mo Williams, Rashard Lewis, Hedo Turkoglu, Larry Hughes, end of their career Gilbert Arenas, Vince Carter and Shaq.

Do any of these guys sound like OKC or Spurs guys?

This isn't intended to discredit Duncan or Durant. I agree they are very level headed and rather humble guys. But Lebron and Howard only got their reps AFTER they left their teams, who were doing a rather poor job building around them. Throwing money at inefficient players who had a name.

OKC and SA kept snagging up efficient well rounded players when no one else was looking.

I actually disagree with this quite significantly. This is one of the strengths of teams like the Spurs and OKC lies.

Lebron and Dwight both re-signeded with their teams initially aswell (much like Durant they were restricted free agents).

Their secondary and tertiary peices were guys like Antwan Jamison, Mo Williams, Rashard Lewis, Hedo Turkoglu, Larry Hughes, end of their career Gilbert Arenas, Vince Carter and Shaq.

Do any of these guys sound like OKC or Spurs guys?

This isn't intended to discredit Duncan or Durant. I agree they are very level headed and rather humble guys. But Lebron and Howard only got their reps AFTER they left their teams, who were doing a rather poor job building around them. Throwing money at inefficient players who had a name.

OKC and SA kept snagging up efficient well rounded players when no one else was looking.

So perhaps the true strength of the Spurs/OKC Model is the talent/respect/longevity of their GM, Head Coach and scouting department, and their ability to target appropriate support/role players, while getting all players (including the superstar) to buy into a team-first system. Success begets success, allowing the entire franchise the freedom to maintain a long-term view of the team, predicated on success and job security.

I actually disagree with this quite significantly. This is one of the strengths of teams like the Spurs and OKC lies.

Lebron and Dwight both re-signeded with their teams initially aswell (much like Durant they were restricted free agents).

Their secondary and tertiary peices were guys like Antwan Jamison, Mo Williams, Rashard Lewis, Hedo Turkoglu, Larry Hughes, end of their career Gilbert Arenas, Vince Carter and Shaq.

Do any of these guys sound like OKC or Spurs guys?

This isn't intended to discredit Duncan or Durant. I agree they are very level headed and rather humble guys. But Lebron and Howardonly got their reps AFTER they left their teams, who were doing a rather poor job building around them. Throwing money at inefficient players who had a name.

OKC and SA kept snagging up efficient well rounded players when no one else was looking.

I agree with what you are saying on the overspending on names.

However, LeBron was known as a primadonna ever since he entered the league and Howard quickly lost the wholesome christian label.

A part of this is young men growing up in the spotlight with a lot of money and surrounded by "yes" men.... and women lol. However a level head and humility goes a long way and that is a big difference between Durant/Duncan and LBJ/Howard. I don't think Durant or Duncan have ever thought of themselves as bigger than the team whereas LBJ and Howard definitely have.

However, LeBron was known as a primadonna ever since he entered the league and Howard quickly lost the wholesome christian label.

A part of this is young men growing up in the spotlight with a lot of money and surrounded by "yes" men.... and women lol. However a level head and humility goes a long way and that is a big difference between Durant/Duncan and LBJ/Howard. I don't think Durant or Duncan have ever thought of themselves as bigger than the team whereas LBJ and Howard definitely have.

Guys like Duncan and Durant also seem like throwback type players to me, in that they like/accept the challenge of winning on their own, with their team. They don't seem like the type of players/people to go for the whole "super team" approach. Duncan's Spurs and Durant's Thunder are way more like Jordan's Bulls, Magic's Lakers and Larry's Celtics, while LBJ & Howard both prefer the easy way out of teaming up with other superstars to 'cheat' the competitive spirit of sports.

So perhaps the true strength of the Spurs/OKC Model is the talent/respect/longevity of their GM, Head Coach and scouting department, and their ability to target appropriate support/role players, while getting all players (including the superstar) to buy into a team-first system. Success begets success, allowing the entire franchise the freedom to maintain a long-term view of the team, predicated on success and job security.

I don't think for a second ownership in SA or OKC hired Burford/Presti and said "we'll give them a decade+ to their thing". These guys earned their security by making good decisions.

Absolutely success can beget success, but it needs to start somewhere. In the NBA you become successful by being bad first - and only then are you successful over the long haul.

Without reading what everyone else has written, here are some of my points. I don't know if you can call the Spurs a model, I mean they got extremely lucky by getting Tim Duncan right around the time David Robinson was finishing up his career. The equivalent of that would be if we had Chris Bosh and managed to draft, say, Blake Griffin just as Bosh made his exit. The chances of that are slim to none, of having that level of luck and coincidence.

The Thunder also has a great "model" if you can call it that. I think it has more to do with shrewd decision making than anything else. Jeff Green was a perfectly good young player that they turned into Kendrick Perkins. Not a flashy player but a player that fills a role they desperately needed. I'm not sure you would see Colangelo ever make a move like that. The decision to not pay James Harden and seize an opportunity to keep building was another shrewd business decision. DeRozan is far from Harden but you look at what we did there, jumped the gun and bid against ourselves and gave him an undeserved contract extension. I mean, Harden deserved one more than DeRozan did, but they traded him instead. Looking back they don't even miss the guy, they're doing just fine without him... they might even be better without him and they have young players on the team plus a draft pick coming in.

In terms of the Spurs model of drafting, a lot has to do with scouting. Apollo said they never got hammered for their draft picks. Well, it's not likely you'll get hammered by Stephen A Smith when you picked 28th or lower every year because people just don't care. That's not to say they haven't selected extremely well, but I don't know how you can "follow" that unless you try to lure the Spurs' scouts over.

I would say rather than following a "model", you just need to be versatile. You need to able to seize opportunities and adapt as needed without getting desperate.

What would Toronto (and every other similar team) do in the meantime, while they patiently await the arrival of their future hall-of-famer? I just don't think that's a viable strategy, since there is so much luck involved. The franchise would also doom itself, since constant tanking would turn off potential GM/coaching candidates, free agents, prospects, media, sponsors and fans. The team could successfully tank for a decade and never wind up with a franchise-altering draft pick - what then?

My point of comparing the two different approaches is that a team can be quite successful by taking a non-superstar team building approach. Obviously there's no such thing as guaranteed success, but I do believe there's much more liklihood of success via that route, than waiting/hoping/praying/lucking into a superstar via the draft. Of course, even "success" is subjective, regardless of the route taken.

I think Houston and Denver would be good examples of what you're talking about here. Houston just kept collection solid players and draft picks to get more solid players, flipped some of them for Harden... then went right back to collecting pieces (Thomas Robinson). Denver got a great haul of good to really good players for Carmelo and are now perennial playoff contenders one upgrade away from being a championship contender. I read a lot of posts that said patience is key; I would add foresight to that. Carmelo was traded early enough that Denver still had some leverage and Morey is on record saying he doesn't think the Harden trade goes down without Toronto's lottery pick.

Time for a reality check. Let's see how many players come into the league with the potential to take their teams to the finals in the past 10 years.

2003.) Lebron #1
I don't include Wade because he needed Shaq to get to the finals, and the team reverted to mediocre garbage once Shaq was gone until LBJ arrived.

2004.) Dwight Howard #1

2007.) Kevin Durant #2
2008.) Derrick Rose #1
Rose is debatable since he hasn't taken his team there yet, but I think without the superstars convening in Miami they would have been in the finals already.

There hasn't been a franchise changing star drafted since 2008 (a player that can carry his team to the finals). That's 5 years in a row where tanking leaves you in the same boat the next year, albeit with a great player, but still a team that can't hang. That's why "suck and luck" (I love that term) is a super high risk proposition. Not only do you need to have a lotto pick, you pretty much need the 1st overall pick. The odds on getting the first overall pick, combined with the odds of that pick being a hall of fame talent, are absurdly low.

People are trying not to admit it, but the Spurs success is entirely predicated on Duncan. When he retires, they will not be a championship contender anymore. That is where the real test of the Spurs system will begin. Can they build another championship contender without Duncan? I think they can, and I don't think they'll do it by tanking, but instead by some aggressive trades. It will be fun to see either way. I just want people to realize the Spurs success isn't due to brilliant management or coaching (they both helped), it's due to Tim Duncan. Without him, the Spurs have zero championship appearances, let alone championships.

A more realistic model for the Raps to copy is the Dallas model. They built around a 9th overall pick and turned it into a championship contender and winner. I think we need to look at Jonas as our "Dirk", and start to build around him the way Dallas did. I actually think we're doing a decent job of it now, we just need to keep it up and keep our fingers crossed Jonas gets to a Dirk level of domination (that hook shot + his FT skills could do it in time).

For more perspective, Dirk was drafted in 1998. Dallas didn't make the playoffs until 2001, but has made the playoffs every year since then until this year. They made the NBA finals twice in that span, winning once. That's a pretty damn good run, and shows you how a championship team can be built through years of playoff experience. Just look at the roster of their championship team.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2...vericks_season
Dirk is the only superstar in the bunch. The Raps could build something like that.

I think Jonas will be ready to take the team to the next level in the 2015-16 season, when the Raps have plenty of space to put whatever missing pieces we need around him. The Heat should also be significantly diminished by then, meaning that we have a real shot of coming out of the East. That is the most realistic path for the Raps to get to the NBA finals, the Dallas plan.

There's no question that the Spurs are a very well coached team, and have done very well with a great coach, and one of the best of all time in Duncan, but some people need rid themselves of this myth that the organization are geniuses in judging talent and drafting.

1. Ginobli: If anyone believes the Spurs actually had a clue what Ginobli would turn into, why would they have waited
until the 57th pick to grab him, instead of wasting the 29 pick on a mentally ill Leon Smith who never saw the floor for them? Great scouting on a pick that spent as much time in mental institutions as in the NBA, hey.

So, any great genius draft picks in the last 11 years? The idea that keeps getting spewed, that they always seem to make good picks late in the draft, is totally a myth, yet people keep spewing it over and over. The draft is as much a crap shoot for them as anyone else.

Guys like Duncan and Durant also seem like throwback type players to me, in that they like/accept the challenge of winning on their own, with their team. They don't seem like the type of players/people to go for the whole "super team" approach. Duncan's Spurs and Durant's Thunder are way more like Jordan's Bulls, Magic's Lakers and Larry's Celtics, while LBJ & Howard both prefer the easy way out of teaming up with other superstars to 'cheat' the competitive spirit of sports.

That is so stupid. Duncan's Spurs and Durant's Thunder started winning big how long after they got drafted? Duncan won his first championship in his third season. Durant has yet to lose more than 32 games in a season since his first two years in the league. LeBron played with a team that won 19 games the year he left - in the East. In their best year, Cleveland's management would've been thoroughly outplayed by San Antonio's or Oklahoma's in their worst. Why leave when management is good enough to bring the super team to you?

The Spurs are a good team to look at for sustaining their success. They more than any other team in the league, and that's including the Lakers, have maximized their talent for the longest duration by continually putting the correct pieces around their core of Duncan, Parker and Ginobili. But having said that they had a centre peice, franchise player to build around and they didn't do anything shrewd to attain him. They were simply blessed by the draft day Gods when they landed the number one pick and snagged Duncan. Simple, dumb, luck.

The Spurs are a good team to look at for sustaining their success. They more than any other team in the league, and that's including the Lakers, have maximized their talent for the longest duration by continually putting the correct pieces around their core of Duncan, Parker and Ginobili. But having said that they had a centre peice, franchise player to build around and they didn't do anything shrewd to attain him. They were simply blessed by the draft day Gods when they landed the number one pick and snagged Duncan. Simple, dumb, luck.

They actually lucked out twice, as they got Robinson as well with the number one pick. I personally don't think Duncan would have been as good without Robinson there as his mentor. Duncan is talented but I don't think he'd be the leader he is today without Robinson being there originally.

Money Ball: The Dallas plan to sustained success

Lots of talk about the Spurs being a blueprint for sustained success that the Raptors should follow. I have to disagree, because the Spurs success was built on getting a hall of famer with the #1 overall pick. Without Tim Duncan, the Spurs don't win or even compete for any championships. So, is getting a top lottery pick the way to go, or is there a better more easily accomplished model? Let's see how many players come into the league with the potential to take their teams to the finals in the past 10 years.

2003.) Lebron #1
I don't include Wade because he needed Shaq to get to the finals, and the team reverted to mediocre garbage once Shaq was gone until LBJ arrived.

2004.) Dwight Howard #1

2007.) Kevin Durant #2

2008.) Derrick Rose #1
Rose is debatable since he hasn't taken his team there yet, but I think without the superstars convening in Miami they would have been in the finals already.

There hasn't been a franchise changing star drafted since 2008 (a player that can carry his team to the finals). That's 5 years in a row where tanking leaves you in the same boat the next year, albeit with a great player, but still a team that can't hang. That's why "suck and luck" (I love that term) is a super high risk proposition. Not only do you need to have a lotto pick, you pretty much need the 1st overall pick. The odds on getting the first overall pick, combined with the odds of that pick being a hall of fame talent, are absurdly low.

A more realistic model for the Raps to copy is the Dallas model. They built around a 9th overall pick and turned it into a championship contender and winner. I think we need to look at Jonas as our "Dirk", and start to build around him the way Dallas did. I actually think we're doing a decent job of it now, we just need to keep it up and keep our fingers crossed Jonas gets to a Dirk level of domination (that hook shot + his FT skills could do it in time).

For more perspective, Dirk was drafted in 1998. Dallas didn't make the playoffs until 2001, but has made the playoffs every year since then until this year. They made the NBA finals twice in that span, winning once. That's a pretty damn good run, and shows you how a championship team can be built through years of playoff experience. Just look at the roster of their championship team.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2...vericks_season
Dirk is the only superstar in the bunch. The Raps could build something like that.

I think Jonas will be ready to take the team to the next level in the 2015-16 season, when the Raps have plenty of space to put whatever missing pieces we need around him. The Heat should also be significantly diminished by then, meaning that we have a real shot of coming out of the East. That is the most realistic path for the Raps to get to the NBA finals, the Dallas plan.

Sorry I made a new thread, but I posted this a few days ago and no one responded or mentioned Dallas as a possible model, just kept talking about the Spurs. Maybe they skipped my post because it was long. Either way, I don't want to talk about the Spurs as a model, I want to talk about Dallas a model, hence the new thread. The Spurs discussion is dumb in my eyes because it all started with a #1 pick who became possibly the greatest PF of all time. That's not a blueprint, that's luck. Everything else they did doesn't mean shit unless they get Tim Duncan in that draft.

Sorry I made a new thread, but I posted this a few days ago and no one responded or mentioned Dallas as a possible model, just kept talking about the Spurs. Maybe they skipped my post because it was long. Either way, I don't want to talk about the Spurs as a model, I want to talk about Dallas a model, hence the new thread. The Spurs discussion is dumb in my eyes because it all started with a #1 pick who became possibly the greatest PF of all time. That's not a blueprint, that's luck. Everything else they did doesn't mean shit unless they get Tim Duncan in that draft.

One could argue that the 'Dallas Model' also starts with a HOF PF and the team's success comes from putting the 'right' parts around him.

There seems to be 2 basic models for franchises to follow:

1. Build around a superstar by adding players that 'fit' (ie: high skilled role players) - OKC, Spurs, Mavs models

2. Build a well rounded team, continually improving the 'weak link' on both the starting and 2nd units, without having a superstar to build around

We've seen Toronto try and fail multiple times to use #1 with illegitimate superstar (ie: Bosh, Bargnani, DeRozan), so I think approach #2 is the logical option going forward.

One could argue that the 'Dallas Model' also starts with a HOF PF and the team's success comes from putting the 'right' parts around him.

There seems to be 2 basic models for franchises to follow:

1. Build around a superstar by adding players that 'fit' (ie: high skilled role players) - OKC, Spurs, Mavs models

2. Build a well rounded team, continually improving the 'weak link' on both the starting and 2nd units, without having a superstar to build around

We've seen Toronto try and fail multiple times to use #1 with illegitimate superstar (ie: Bosh, Bargnani, DeRozan), so I think approach #2 is the logical option going forward.

The big difference being Dirk was a #9 pick who was a somewhat unknown international player that Dallas developed into a star (Jonas anyone?). Dirk barely played his first season. Tim Duncan was a known beast right from the start. averaging nearly 40 minutes per game and 21pts right out of the gate. Dallas also struggled in the lotto for several years after they drafted Dirk. San Antonio has made the playoffs every year since Duncan was drafted and won the NBA championship in Duncan's second year. I just think the Dallas situation is way more applicable to the Raps. They also had a GM who made some mistakes (letting Nash go) but eventually got it right, which is much closer to the Raps GM situation. People can't look at the Spurs and say, the Raps could do that. I think you can look at Dallas and say, the Raps could do that. Jonas can be our Dirk in 3 years (20 and 10 guy).

The big difference being Dirk was a #9 pick who was a somewhat unknown international player that Dallas developed into a star (Jonas anyone?). Dirk barely played his first season. Tim Duncan was a known beast right from the start. averaging nearly 40 minutes per game and 21pts right out of the gate. Dallas also struggled in the lotto for several years after they drafted Dirk. San Antonio has made the playoffs every year since Duncan was drafted and won the NBA championship in Duncan's second year. I just think the Dallas situation is way more applicable to the Raps. They also had a GM who made some mistakes (letting Nash go) but eventually got it right, which is much closer to the Raps GM situation. People can't look at the Spurs and say, the Raps could do that. I think you can look at Dallas and say, the Raps could do that. Jonas can be our Dirk in 3 years (20 and 10 guy).

It took Dirk a few years to develop into the HOF'er he is and the team didn't have success until he did. All the success after that (including their championship), was the exact same formula as the Spurs/OKC, etc... put the right parts around a superstar.

At this point in time there's no way of guaranteeing that any Raptor player will become a legit superstar to be built around. That's all just wishful thinking, which has been BC's approach in the past with Bosh, Bargnani, etc...

It took Dirk a few years to develop into the HOF'er he is and the team didn't have success until he did. All the success after that (including their championship), was the exact same formula as the Spurs/OKC, etc... put the right parts around a superstar.

At this point in time there's no way of guaranteeing that any Raptor player will become a legit superstar to be built around. That's all just wishful thinking, which has been BC's approach in the past with Bosh, Bargnani, etc...

If the goal is sustained success (a realistic goal) then you don't need a HOF'er to build around. You do need an All Star though. I think the Raps have one in Jonas, now it's just timing and making sure the right pieces are around him. I'd also note that Dirk developed into a HOF type talent by playing the playoffs every year, not by being on a team that repeatedly tanked to get high picks. So if we want Jonas to become that type of talent, we need to be shooting for the playoffs and not the lottery again. I don't think you've advocated that but a lot of people around these parts do. It's hard to develop players into champions if you're asking them to tank.